PDA

View Full Version : A true modern functional martial art?



drDalek
1st July 2003, 12:39
Kung Fu was invented in ancient China right? Based on their belief that the human body and its system of believed intrinsic energy (chi) was the most important weapon of the time. Sure China has its weapon arts but its so interwoven with empty hand forms of Kung Fu as not to count strongly as seperate arts.

The Japanese invented Jujitsu and Kenjitsu, because the japanese sword (katana) was the most important weapon of the time. Jujitsu came into being because its a lot more effecient to break someones joints by manipulating them than it is to punch through the armor of the period.

So the question now is: Why are we, modern human beings living in modern times with modern weapons still relying on these ancient systems. If you discount the philosophical and spiritual value of these systems and look at them from a purely functional perspective, why have we not formalized a .45-fu or a kevlar-jitsu?

Sure the armed forces of the world drill and practice extensively with firearms but their successes are all due to sharp teamwork and tactics and much less atributable to the individual marksman's abilities.

Just some random thoughts, feel free to ignore me...

StanLee
1st July 2003, 13:09
How about the art of "I'll sue your arse off if I'm injured" jutsu.

Stan

drDalek
1st July 2003, 13:17
Originally posted by StanLee
How about the art of "I'll sue your arse off if I'm injured" jutsu.

Stan

Only in America where life is cheap and litigation cheaper. Why not join my dojo? Become a PISTOL NINJA in 10 easy lessons or 10 easy payments, whichever I get first.

Martin Adil-Smi
1st July 2003, 13:27
I see what you are trying to say, but the attitude in martial arts at the time of their inception is relevant today... unfortunately one cannot so easily discount the philosophical side.

That aside, my soke always says, when we are doing CP training, that he would much rather have a gun jabbed into his gut than a knife. The reason being that gun can only harm you in one direction (eg; from the muzzle) whereas a knife can harm you from 2 or 3 (point, and edge/s).

Therefore at least some weapon training is relevant.

Then of course there is the whole fitness thing, keeping out of trouble etc etc...

Sam
1st July 2003, 13:41
cough cough*systema*cough

joe yang
1st July 2003, 13:53
Well I train in a dysfunctional martial art, which I find perfectly relevant today.

drDalek
1st July 2003, 13:56
Originally posted by Sam
cough cough*systema*cough

hmm, heard the name before but not much else, care to enlighten me?

Sam
1st July 2003, 16:38
Originally posted by drDalek


hmm, heard the name before but not much else, care to enlighten me?

I'm pretty new to systema, I gave up eight years of aikido to do it, so obviously can't be trusted to offer a clear unbiased view. The general idea is skill developement, but not technique developement (we have no techniques but make our own spontaneously). Its hard to describe how it works, but because of its continued and long history of use by some of the russian military a lot of skills relevant to modern life get passed down to us.
More info:
www.russianmartialart.com

video clips:
http://groups.msn.com/RMAHamilton/videoclips.msnw
http://www.sctca.co.uk/

my group:
http://www21.brinkster.com/cityrma/

Hope this doesn't hijack the thread...

Jack B
1st July 2003, 17:34
Reminds me of Frank Doran, or Karl Geis, or even Mifune Kyuzo. When Aikido people do that stuff they say it's faked. But it works.

monkeyboy_ssj
1st July 2003, 17:58
Also it is illegal to carry weapons in this day and age, and these Ancient systems work so why bother changing them.

Simple.

Martin Adil-Smi
1st July 2003, 18:05
Originally posted by monkeyboy_ssj
Also it is illegal to carry weapons in this day and age, and these Ancient systems work so why bother changing them.

Simple.

Unfortunately, just because it is illegal, doesn't stop some numbskulls doing it anyway! Just one more reason to keep training...

Shitoryu Dude
1st July 2003, 18:11
We study old martial arts because people haven't changed that much in the intervening centuries. Most people are unarmed the majority of the time and will use whatever they can grab onto as a weapon. Body mechanics are the same now as they were then, so there is no need to reinvent the wheel just to be "modern". Use of various cutting and striking implements, and defense against them, haven't really undergone much of a change because there is no need to. We aren't bulletproof and nobody's reaction time is faster than a bullet, so unless you want to play Remo Williams there aren't really any defenses against someone shooting at you.

I would suggest that everybody go learn how to shoot.

:beer:

elder999
1st July 2003, 18:49
Originally posted by monkeyboy_ssj
Also it is illegal to carry weapons in this day and age, and these Ancient systems work so why bother changing them.

Simple.

Not where I come from, it isn't.

http://www.mcsm.org/concealed1.html

http://www.cnsnews.com/Nation/archive/200303/NAT20030327c.html

joe yang
1st July 2003, 19:06
As we have said before, we study martial arts for various reasons. Some of us do study traditional style martial arts to learn practical fighting skills. Some traditional instructors do train good combat, reality, street, what ever fighters. Beyond that, some of us study traditional martial arts because we want to learn more than just how to fight.

Some of us also enjoy the sport. Some of us enjoy the meditation, spiritual growth and character developement. Traditional arts often better suit the martial artist who wants it all.

seskoad
1st July 2003, 19:36
It's more hobby or what you are interested in. I like empty hand fighting so I learn karate. I like samurai stuff so I learn iaido. I like cowboy stuff so I bought western boots. I like army stuff so I tried to join (but rejected)......:D

For me it is more about what I want and what I am interested in. So the word "why" is complicated for me. I am simple man.

if you asked me "why do you love women?", my answer will be "blah blah blah blah". too long and complicated.

But if you asked me "do you love women?". My answer is "of course"

Mitch Saret
1st July 2003, 19:49
I think we already have a "kevlar-ryu" now....traditional ju-jutsu. A kevlar vest isn't much different than the laquered armor of the samurai, at least weight and bulk wise. And when I was in the army, during some civil defense training with the vests on, I actually used some judo to show what we could do with out permanently damaging a civilian because the instructor just knew what he was taught.

Besides, just because you won't be attacked by a swordsman doesn't mean the principles of the art don't apply.

Sillal
1st July 2003, 22:44
Besides, just because you won't be attacked by a swordsman doesn't mean the principles of the art don't apply.

If you have a sword sitting around your house, or on your mantle someone breaking into your house might attack you with it. Or there is that guy who carved up a bunch of his co workers Highlander style on another thread.

MarkF
1st July 2003, 22:49
Aaron,

(Rhetorically) Do you know how many times I've answered the same question concerning New Mexico law concerning guns and carry permits?

The CCW permit is rather disappointing, I much like the cowpokes who carry six shooters (long colts) strapped to the thighs.

Things haven't changed much since I've lived here, except for that new Archie Bunker law.


Mark

Martin Adil-Smi
1st July 2003, 22:58
I've just had one of my famous (though not regular) thoughts.

Ultimately there are only so many ways to kick or punch a person, to put on a wrist lock or arm bar, or neutralise a potential threat.

Now the actual application (in terms of combination of moves) can vary. But it is the ancient ways that essentially have covered the the above... so why spend time reinventing the wheel?

StanLee
2nd July 2003, 08:32
And from the wise words of engineers of old, "If it ain't broke, don't touch it"!

Go figure.

Stan

Sam
2nd July 2003, 10:35
Originally posted by Martin Adil-Smi
I've just had one of my famous (though not regular) thoughts.

Ultimately there are only so many ways to kick or punch a person, to put on a wrist lock or arm bar, or neutralise a potential threat.

Now the actual application (in terms of combination of moves) can vary. But it is the ancient ways that essentially have covered the the above... so why spend time reinventing the wheel?

True. However I think that the difference between our society and that of pre-1900 Japan means that even modern budo is not always the most appropriate way to train.

The self-imposed rules surrounding Japanese society meant that the element of surprise was less common and the type of attack, especially with a sword, was more predictable. The main problem for the Japanese was the speed and generally lethal nature of an attack. This could be why kata became popular (amongst other reasons).
In modern society we have a different problem - the attacker less often intends to kill you at the first moment, but is often completely unpredictable or sneaky.
Therefore training should perhaps contain this unpredictable element throughout to make a more flexible individual if we wish to avoid struggling to apply something that worked well in normal training because we chose the wrong moment.

drDalek
2nd July 2003, 11:25
Originally posted by Sam

True. However I think that the difference between our society and that of pre-1900 Japan means that even modern budo is not always the most appropriate way to train.

The self-imposed rules surrounding Japanese society meant that the element of surprise was less common and the type of attack, especially with a sword, was more predictable. The main problem for the Japanese was the speed and generally lethal nature of an attack. This could be why kata became popular (amongst other reasons).

You are forgetting about all those very, very sneaky ninjas.

Sam
2nd July 2003, 12:45
So I am. But isn't that why the ninja were successful - they were sneaky and therefore unusual?

dirithtai
2nd July 2003, 19:20
Curses, he knows too much!!

Actually, I've been given to understand that a lot of samurai arts were designed to deal with ninja esque sudden and unusual attacks, aswell as dining etiqutette. For instance, Takagi Yoshin Ryu was a school used by bodygaurds and hatamoto, a lot of techniques designed to deal with sudden indoor attacks from concealed weapons, when you aren't armed armored or whatever.

And does anyone know the reason you hold chopsticks to the side when you eat with them? Simple, so someone doesn't hit them and drive them thru your skull. (also a reason for the "shoveling" technique with the rice bowl, well, one of em.)

Not to mention, there isn't much difference between the practical use of a lead pipe and a katana, aside from the niceties of form. there are still the same basic sets of attacks, likely minus the thrusting, etc.

About the only problem dealt with today that isn't analogus to something one would have to be prepared for in fuedal japan would be "glock-fu" and "colt Jutsu." Though, most modern "self defense" courses will offer ideas for dealing with these, the best bet is not to be around when those 2 arts get put into use.

Mitch Saret
3rd July 2003, 20:29
Lance,
You seemingly scoff at my suggestion that the principles of defending against a swordsman still apply today. Are body movement, distance, and timing not applicable in modern self defense? Have you ever heard of an attack with a tire iron, baseball bat, or any other implement of about 3 - 4 feet in lentgh? Isn't a knife just a very short sword....or is a sword a very long knife? I keep getting confused on that one.

My conclusion is that you are either having a fun little joke or your exposure to martial arts is limited. And there is the possibility of never having to defend your life or that of others in a real situation, but that would be an assumption and rude of me, so we'll leave it at the previous conclusion.